Document: Webroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Competitors (April 2017)
Authors:
M. Baquiran, D. Wren
Company: PassMark Software
Date:
26 April 2017
File:
Webroot_SecureAnywhere_Business_vs_competitors_2017_Edition_1.docx
Edition1

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................................... 2
REVISION HISTORY............................................................................................................................................ 3
REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................................... 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................... 4
OVERALL SCORE ................................................................................................................................................ 5
PRODUCTS AND VERSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 6PERFORMANCE METRICS SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 7
TEST RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................. 10
BENCHMARK 1 – INSTALLATION TIME ........................................................................................................................ 10
BENCHMARK 2 – INSTALLATION SIZE ......................................................................................................................... 10
BENCHMARK 3 – BOOT TIME ................................................................................................................................... 11
BENCHMARK 4 – CPU USAGE DURING IDLE ................................................................................................................ 11
BENCHMARK 5 – CPU USAGE DURING SCAN .............................................................................................................. 12
BENCHMARK 6 – MEMORY USAGE DURING SYSTEM IDLE .............................................................................................. 12
BENCHMARK 7 – MEMORY USAGE DURING INITIAL SCAN .............................................................................................. 13
BENCHMARK 8 – SCHEDULED SCAN TIME ................................................................................................................... 13
BENCHMARK 9 – BROWSE TIME ............................................................................................................................... 14
BENCHMARK 10 – FILE COPY, MOVE, AND DELETE ...................................................................................................... 14
BENCHMARK 11 – FILE COMPRESSION AND DECOMPRESSION ........................................................................................ 15
BENCHMARK 12 – FILE WRITE, OPEN, AND CLOSE ....................................................................................................... 15
BENCHMARK 13 – NETWORK THROUGHPUT ............................................................................................................... 16
BENCHMARK 14 – MEMORY USAGE DURING SCHEDULED SCAN ..................................................................................... 16
DISCLAIMER AND DISCLOSURE ....................................................................................................................... 17
CONTACT DETAILS .......................................................................................................................................... 17
APPENDIX 1 – TEST ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................................ 18
APPENDIX 2 – METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 19

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 2 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

Rev
Edition 1

Revision History

1

Date

Initial version of this report.

Ref #Document

What Really Slows Windows Down (URL)

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

PassMark Software

26 April 2017

AuthorO. Warner,
The PC Spy

Date

2001-2017

Page 3 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

PassMark Software® conducted objective performance testing on eight (8) security software products, on
Windows 10 (64-bit) during March and April 2017. This report presents our results and findings as a result of
performance benchmark testing conducted for these endpoint security products.
The aim of this benchmark was to compare the performance impact of Webroot’s SecureAnywhere BusinessEndpoint Protection product with seven (7) competitor products.
Testing was performed on all products using fourteen (14) performance metrics. These performance metrics are
as follows.
• Installation Time;• Installation Size;• Boot Time;• CPU Usage during Idle;• CPU Usage during Scan;• Memory Usage during System Idle;• Memory Usage during Initial Scan;• Scheduled Scan Time;• Browse Time;• File Copy, Move, and Delete;• File Compression and Decompression;• File Write, Open, and Close;• Network Throughput; and• Memory Usage during Initial Scan.

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 4 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

PassMark Software assigned every product a score depending on its ranking in each metric compared to otherproducts in the same category. In the following table the highest possible score attainable has been normalized to100. This would be the score given if a product attained first place in all fourteen (14) metrics. Endpoint products
have been ranked by their overall scores:
Product Name

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Overall Score

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

95

Trend Micro Worry-Free Business Security Advanced

61

Symantec Endpoint Protection Cloud

53

Sophos Endpoint Protection

53

ESET Endpoint Security

52

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

51

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

45

Kaspersky Small Office Security

41

Page 5 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

For each security product, we have tested the most current and publicly available version. The names and versionsof products are given below:

Product Version

Date
TestedWebroot SecureAnywhere Business Endpoint
Protection

9.0.15.40

March
2017

Trend Micro Worry Free Business Security
Advanced

19.0.2166

April 2017

Kaspersky Small Office Security

17.0.0.611 (d)

March
2017

Sophos Endpoint Protection

Endpoint
Security andControl 10.7

April 2017

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

6.2.18.884

April 2017

Symantec Corp

Symantec Endpoint Protection Cloud

22.9.1.12

April 2017

ESET, spol. s r.o.

ESET Endpoint Security

6.5.2094.0

April 2017

Manufacturer

Product Name

Webroot Inc.
Trend Micro Inc.
Kaspersky Lab

SophosBitdefender

Malwarebytes

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

Anti-Malware(Corporate)
1.80.2.1012
AntiRansomware
0.9.17.689

April 2017

Page 6 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

We have selected a set of objective metrics which provide a comprehensive and realistic indication of the areas inwhich endpoint protection products may impact system performance for end users. Our metrics test the impactof the software on common tasks that end-users would perform on a daily basis.
All of PassMark Software’s test methods can be replicated by third parties using the same environment to obtain
similar benchmark results. Detailed descriptions of the methodologies used in our tests are available as “Appendix
2 – Methodology Description” of this report.

The speed and ease of the installation process will strongly influence the user’s first impression of the security
software. This test measures the installation time required by the security software to be fully functional and readyfor use by the end user. Lower installation times represent security products which are quicker for a user to install.

In offering new features and functionality to users, security software products tend to increase in size with eachnew release. Although new technologies push the size limits of hard drives each year, the growing disk spacerequirements of common applications and the increasing popularity of large media files (such as movies, photos
and music) ensure that a product's installation size will remain of interest to home users.
This metric aims to measure a product’s total installation size. This metric is defined as the total disk spaceconsumed by all new files added during a product's installation.

This metric measures the amount of time taken for the machine to boot into the operating system. Security
software is generally launched at Windows startup, adding an additional amount of time and delaying the startupof the operating system. Shorter boot times indicate that the application has had less impact on the normal
operation of the machine.

The amount of memory used while the machine is idle provides a good indication of the amount of system
resources being consumed by the security software on a permanent basis. This metric measures the amount ofmemory (RAM) used by the product while the machine and security software are in an idle state. The total memory
usage was calculated by identifying all the security software’s processes and the amount of memory used by eachprocess.

The amount of load on the CPU while security software conducts a malware scan may prevent the reasonable useof the endpoint machine until the scan has completed. This metric measured the percentage of CPU used by
security software when performing a scan.

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 7 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark SoftwareThis metric measures the amount of memory (RAM) used by the product while the machine and security softwareare in an idle state. The total memory usage was calculated by identifying all security software processes and theamount of memory used by each process.
The amount of memory used while the machine is idle provides a good indication of the amount of system
resources being consumed by the security software on a permanent basis. Better performing products occupy lessmemory while the machine is idle.

This metric measures the amount of memory (RAM) used by the product during an initial security scan on theendpoint’s main drive. The total memory usage was calculated by identifying all security software processes andthe amount of memory used by each process during the scan.

Most security solutions are scheduled by default to scan the system regularly for viruses and malware. This metricmeasured the amount of time required to run a scheduled scan on the system. The scan is set to run at a specified
time via the client user interface.

It is common behavior for security products to scan data for malware as it is downloaded from the internet or
intranet. This behavior may negatively impact browsing speed as products scan web content for malware. This
metric measures the time taken to browse a set of popular internet sites to consecutively load from a local server
in a user’s browser window.

This metric measures the amount of time taken to copy, move and delete a sample set of files. The sample file set
contains several types of file formats that a Windows user would encounter in daily use. These formats include
documents (e.g. Microsoft Office documents, Adobe PDF, Zip files, etc), media formats (e.g. images, movies andmusic) and system files (e.g. executables, libraries, etc).

This metric measures the amount of time taken to compress and decompress different types of files. Files formats
used in this test included documents, movies and images.

This benchmark was derived from Oli Warner’s File I/O test at http://www.thepcspy.com (please see Reference#1: What Really Slows Windows Down). This metric measures the amount of time taken to write a file, then open
and close that file.

The metric measures the amount of time taken to download a variety of files from a local server using theHyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP), which is the main protocol used on the web for browsing, linking and data
Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 8 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Softwaretransfer. Files used in this test include file formats that users would typically download from the web, such asimages, archives, music files and movie files.

This metric measures the amount of memory (RAM) used by the product during a scheduled security scan on thetarget endpoint. The total memory usage was calculated by identifying all security software processes and theamount of memory used by each process during the scan.

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 9 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

In the following charts, we have highlighted the results we obtained for Webroot SecureAnywhere BusinessEndpoint Protection in green. The competitor average has also been highlighted in blue for ease of comparison.

The following chart compares the minimum installation time it takes for endpoint security products to be fully
functional and ready for use by the end user. Products with lower installation times are considered better
performing products in this category.
Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

33

Symantec EP Cloud

42

Kaspersky Small Office Security

59

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

63

ESET Endpoint Security

81

Average98

Sophos Endpoint Protection

157

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

170

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

178

0s

20 s

40 s

60 s

80 s

100 s

120 s

140 s

160 s

180 s

200 s

The following chart compares the total size of files added during the installation of endpoint security products.
Products with lower installation sizes are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

32.9

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

211.5

Kaspersky Small Office Security

468.9

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

548.9

ESET Endpoint Security

594.5

Average

640.4

Sophos Endpoint Protection

856.9

Symantec EP Cloud

1043.0

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security
0 MB

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

1366.5200 MB

400 MB

600 MB

800 MB 1,000 MB 1,200 MB 1,400 MB 1,600 MB

Page 10 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average time taken for the system to boot (from a sample of five boots) for each
endpoint security product tested. Products with lower boot times are considered better performing products inthis category.*
Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

7.3

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

7.7

Kaspersky Small Office Security

7.7

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

8.5

ESET Endpoint Security

8.7

Sophos Endpoint Protection

9.2

Average

9.2

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

15.5

0s

2s

4s

6s

8s

10 s

12 s

14 s

16 s

18 s

*Symantec was omitted from this test as the boot time test could not reach an idle state with the product installed.

The following chart compares the average CPU usage during system idle. Products with lower CPU usage areconsidered better performing products in this category.

Sophos Endpoint Protection

0.39%

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

0.67%

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

0.67%

Kaspersky Small Office Security

0.76%

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

0.80%

ESET Endpoint Security

0.83%

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

1.11%

Average

6.72%

Symantec EP Cloud
0.0%

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

48.53%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Page 11 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average CPU usage during a scan of a set of media files, system files andMicrosoft Office documents that totaled 5.42 GB. Products with lower CPU usage are considered better
performing products in this category.
Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

21.1%

Sophos Endpoint Protection

23.3%

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

24.4%

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

28.0%

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

28.1%

ESET Endpoint Security

29.9%

Average

33.1%

Symantec EP Cloud

51.4%

Kaspersky Small Office Security

59.0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

The following chart compares the average amount of RAM in use by an endpoint security product during a periodof system idle. This average is taken from a sample of ten memory snapshots taken at roughly 60 seconds apartafter reboot. Products with lower idle RAM usage are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

5.8

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

32.9

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

108.3

Sophos Endpoint Protection

126.7

Average

135.3

Symantec EP Cloud

175.4

ESET Endpoint Security

187.1

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

218.6

Kaspersky Small Office Security
0 MB

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

227.9

50 MB

100 MB

150 MB

200 MB250 MB

Page 12 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average amount of RAM in use by an endpoint security product during an initialscan on the main drive. This average is taken from a sample of ten memory snapshots taken at twelve second
intervals during a scan of sample files which have not been previously scanned by the software. Products that use
less memory during a scan are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

23.8

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

106.3

Sophos Endpoint Protection

146.0

Symantec EP Cloud

173.9

ESET Endpoint Security

211.9

Average

217.6

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

331.5

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

364.4

Kaspersky Small Office Security

382.5

0 MB

50 MB 100 MB 150 MB 200 MB 250 MB 300 MB 350 MB 400 MB 450 MB

The following chart compares the average time taken to run a scheduled scan on the system for each security
product tested.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

18

Symantec EP Cloud64

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

152

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

710

ESET Endpoint Security

1219

Average

1567

Sophos Endpoint Protection

2436

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

3255

Kaspersky Small Office Security

4681

0s

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

500 s

1,000 s 1,500 s 2,000 s 2,500 s 3,000 s 3,500 s 4,000 s 4,500 s 5,000 s

Page 13 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average time taken for Internet Explorer to successively load a set of popular
websites through the local area network from a local server machine. Products with lower browse times are
considered better performing products in this category.*

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

16.8

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

17.6

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

19.7

ESET Endpoint Security

19.9

Sophos Endpoint Protection

22.4

Average

25.3

Symantec EP Cloud

34.6

Kaspersky Small Office Security

46.2

0s

5s

10 s

15 s

20 s

25 s

30 s

35 s

40 s

45 s

50 s

* Bitdefender was excluded from this test as the test script was blocked by the application’s phishing filter.

The following chart compares the average time taken to copy, move and delete several sets of sample files foreach endpoint security product tested. Products with lower times are considered better performing products inthis category.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

3.2

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

4.8

Symantec EP Cloud

4.9

ESET Endpoint Security

6.0

Average

8.2

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

9.1

Kaspersky Small Office Security

9.4

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

10.1

Sophos Endpoint Protection

18.2

0s

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

2s

4s

6s

8s

10 s

12 s

14 s

16 s

18 s

Page 14 of 25
26 April 201720 sWebroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average time it takes for sample files to be compressed and decompressed foreach endpoint security product tested. Products with lower times are considered better performing products inthis category.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

39.1

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

40.4

Symantec EP Cloud

40.8

ESET Endpoint Security

41.4

Average

42.8

Sophos Endpoint Protection

43.4

Kaspersky Small Office Security

44.4

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

44.8

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

47.9

0s

10 s

20 s

30 s

40 s

50 s

60 s

The following chart compares the average time it takes for a file to be written to the hard drive then opened andclosed 180,000 times, for each endpoint security product tested. Products with lower times are considered better
performing products in this category.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

10.2

Kaspersky Small Office Security

13.8

Symantec EP Cloud

20.0

Sophos Endpoint Protection

52.2

ESET Endpoint Security

79.9

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

185.1

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

242.9

Average

741.4

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

5327.50s

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

1,000 s2,000 s3,000 s4,000 s5,000 s6,000 sPage 15 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

The following chart compares the average time to download a sample set of common file types for each endpoint
security product tested. Products with lower times are considered better performing products in this category.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

6.0

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

6.4

ESET Endpoint Security

6.5

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

6.7

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security

6.8

Average

7.3

Symantec EP Cloud

8.2

Sophos Endpoint Protection

8.5

Kaspersky Small Office Security

9.2

0s

1s

2s

3s

4s

5s

6s

7s

8s

9s

10 s

The following chart compares the average amount of RAM in use by an endpoint security product during ascheduled scan on the endpoint. This average is taken from a sample of five memory snapshots taken at fivesecond intervals. Products that use less memory during a scan are considered better performing products in thiscategory.

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection

7.6

Trend Micro WFBS Advanced

24.0

Symantec EP Cloud

131.5

Sophos Endpoint Protection

158.9

Average

191.0

ESET Endpoint Security

221.3

Kaspersky Small Office Security

298.5

Bitdefender GravityZone Business Security

325.9

Malwarebytes Endpoint Security
0 MB

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

360.2

50 MB

100 MB

150 MB

200 MB250 MB

300 MB

350 MB

400 MB

Page 16 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark SoftwareThis report only covers versions of products that were available at the time of testing. The tested versions are as
noted in the “Products and Versions” section of this report. The products we have tested are not an exhaustive
list of all products available in these very competitive product categories.

While every effort has been made to ensure that the information presented in this report is accurate, PassMark
Software Pty Ltd assumes no responsibility for errors, omissions, or out-of-date information and shall not be liable
in any manner whatsoever for direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages resulting from theavailability of, use of, access of, or inability to use this information.

Webroot Inc. funded the production of this report. The list of products tested and the metrics included in thereport were selected by Webroot.

All trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

PassMark Software Pty Ltd
Level 563 Foveaux St.
Surry Hills, 2010
Sydney, Australia
Phone + 61 (2) 9690 0444
Fax

+ 61 (2) 9690 0445

Web

www.passmark.com

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 17 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

Model:

Lenovo H50W-50 i5

CPU:Intel Core i5-4460 CPU @ 3.20GHz 3.20 GHz

Video Card:

NVIDIA GeForce GT 705

RAM:

8GB DDR3 RAM

SSD (Main Boot Drive):

Samsung SSD 850 PRO 512 GBnd

2 Drive:

Samsung 1000GB 7200RPM HD103UJ

Network:

Gigabit (1Gb/s) switch

O/S:

Windows 10 Home 10.0 (Build 10240)

PassMark Software

The Web and File server was not benchmarked directly, but served the web pages and files to the endpoint
machine during performance testing.
CPU:
Video Card:
Motherboard:
RAM:
SSD:
Network:

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10Intel Xeon E3-1220v2 CPU
Kingston 8GB (2 x 4GB ECC RAM)Intel S1200BTL Server
Kingston 8GB (2 x 4GB) ECC RAM, 1333Mhz
OCZ 128GB 2.5” Solid State Disk
Gigabit (1GB/s)

Page 18 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

As with testing on Windows Vista, Norton Ghost was used to create a “clean” baseline image prior to testing. Our
aim is to create a baseline image with the smallest possible footprint and reduce the possibility of variation causedby external operating system factors.
The baseline image was restored prior to testing of each different product. This process ensures that we install
and test all products on the same, “clean” machine.
The steps taken to create the base Windows 10 image are as follows:1.

Installation and activation of Windows 10.

2.

Disabled Automatic Updates.

3.

Changed User Account Control settings to “Never Notify”.

4.

Disable Windows Defender automatic scans to avoid unexpected background activity.

5.

Disable the Windows firewall to avoid interference with security software.

6.

Disabled Superfetch to ensure consistent results.

7.

Installed HTTP Watch for Browse Time testing.

8.

Installed Windows 10 Assessment and Deployment Kit (ADK) for Boot Time testing.

9.

Installed Active Perl for interpretation of some test scripts.

10.

Install OSForensics for testing (Installation Size and Registry Key Count tests) purposes.

11.

Disabled Windows updates.

12.

Install important Windows updates.

13.

Created a baseline image of the boot drive using OSForensics.

This test measures the minimum Installation Time a product requires to be fully functional and ready for use by
the end user. Installation time can usually be divided in three major phases:• The Extraction and Setup phase consists of file extraction, the EULA prompt, product activation and user
configurable options for installation.
• The File Copy phase occurs when the product is being installed; usually this phase is indicated by a progress
bar.
• The Post-Installation phase is any part of the installation that occurs after the File Copy phase. This phasevaries widely between products; the time recorded in this phase may include a required reboot to finalize theinstallation or include the time the program takes to become idle in the system tray.
To reduce the impact of disk drive variables, each product was copied to the Desktop before initializing installation.
Each step of the installation process was manually timed with a stopwatch and recorded in as much detail as
possible. Where input was required by the end user, the stopwatch was paused and the input noted in the raw
results in parenthesis after the phase description.

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 19 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

Where possible, all requests by products to pre-scan or post-install scan were declined or skipped. Where it was
not possible to skip a scan, the time to scan was included as part of the installation time. Where an optional
component of the installation formed a reasonable part of the functionality of the software, it was also installed(e.g. website link checking software as part of a Security Product).
Installation time includes the time taken by the product installer to download components required in the
installation. This may include mandatory updates or the delivery of the application itself from a download
manager. We have noted in our results where a product has downloaded components for product installation.
We have excluded product activation times due to network variability in contacting vendor servers or time takenin account creation. For all products tested, the installation was performed directly on the endpoint, either using
a standalone installation package or via the management server web console.

A product's Installation Size was previously defined as the difference between the initial snapshot of the Disk Space(C: drive) before installation and the subsequent snapshot taken after the product is installed on the system.
Although this is a widely used methodology, we noticed that the results it yielded were not always reproducible
in Vista due to random OS operations that may take place between the two snapshots. We improved theInstallation Size methodology by removing as many Operating System and disk space variables as possible.
Using PassMark’s OSForensics 2.2 we created initial and post-installation disk signatures for each product. These
disk signatures recorded the amount of files and directories, and complete details of all files on that drive (including
file name, file size, checksum, etc) at the time the signature was taken.
The initial disk signature was taken immediately prior to installation of the product. A subsequent disk signature
was taken immediately following a system reboot after product installation. Using OSForensics, we compared thetwo signatures and calculated the total disk space consumed by files that were new, modified, and deleted during
product installation. Our result for this metric reflects the total size of all newly added files during installation.
The scope of this metric includes only an ‘out of the box’ installation size for each product. Our result does notcover the size of files downloaded by the product after its installation (such as engine or signature updates), or
any files created by system restore points, pre-fetch files and other temporary files.

PassMark Software uses tools available from the Windows Performance Toolkit (as part of the Microsoft Windows
10 ADK obtainable from the Microsoft Website).
The Boot Performance (fast startup) test is ran as an individual assessment via the Windows Assessment Console.
The network connection is disabled and the login password is removed to avoid interruption to the test. The final
result is taken as the total boot duration excluding BIOS load time.

CPUAvg is a command-line tool which samples the amount of CPU load two times per second. From this, CPUAvg
calculates and displays the average CPU load for the interval of time for which it has been active.

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 20 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

For this metric, CPUAvg was used to measure the CPU load on average (as a percentage) during a period of system
idle for 500 samples. This test is conducted after restarting the endpoint machine and after five minutes ofmachine idle.

CPUAvg is a command-line tool which samples the amount of CPU load approximately two times per second. From
this, CPUAvg calculates and displays the average CPU load for the interval of time for which it has been active.
For this metric, CPUAvg was used to measure the CPU load on average (as a percentage) by the system while theOn-Demand Scan Time test was being conducted. The final result was calculated as an average five sets of thirty
CPU load samples.

The MemLog++ utility was used to record process memory usage on the system at boot, and then every minutefor another fifteen minutes after. This was done only once per product and resulted in a total of 15 samples. The
first sample taken at boot is discarded.
The MemLog++ utility records memory usage of all processes, not just those of the anti-malware product. As aresult of this, an anti-malware product’s processes needed to be isolated from all other running system processes.
To isolate relevant process, we used a program called Process Explorer which was run immediately upon thecompletion of memory usage logging by MemLog++. Process Explorer is a Microsoft Windows Sysinternals
software tool which shows a list of all DLL processes currently loaded on the system.

The MemLog++ utility was used to record memory usage on the system while a malware scan is in progress. Pleaserefer to the metric “Memory usage – System Idle” above for a description of the MemLog++utility and an
explanation of the method by which memory usage is calculated.
As some products cache scan locations, we take reasonable precautions to ensure that the security software does
not scan the C:\ drive at any point before conducting this test. A manual scan on the C:\ drive is initiated at thesame time as the MemLog++ utility, enabling MemLog++ to record memory usage for 120 seconds at 12 second
intervals.

This scan is configured as a full system scheduled scan from user interface. The default scheduled scan settings are
kept (except for the start time) and the scan is scheduled to run at the next convenient time. To record the scantime, we have used product’s built-in scan timer or reporting system. Where this was not possible, scan times
were taken manually with a stopwatch.
The scan is run three times with a reboot between each run to remove potential caching effects. In the past, many
products have shown a substantial difference between the initial scan time (first scan) and subsequent scan times(scans 2 to 5). We believe this behavior is due to products themselves caching recently scanned files. As a resultof this mechanism, we have averaged the four subsequent scan times to obtain an average subsequent scan time.
Our final result for this test is an average of the subsequent scan average and the initial scan time. Where thisoption is not available, the product is omitted from the metric, and given the lowest score for this metric.
Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 21 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark Software

We used a script in conjunction with HTTPWatch (Basic Edition, version 9.1.13.0) to record the amount of time ittakes for a set of 106 ‘popular’ websites to load consecutively from a local server. This script feeds a list of URLs
into HTTPWatch, which instructs the browser to load pages in sequence and monitors the amount of time it takes
for the browser to load all items on one page.
For this test, we have used Internet Explorer 11 (11.0.9600.17801) as our browser.
The set of websites used in this test include front pages of high traffic pages. This includes shopping, social, news,
finance and reference websites.
The Browse Time test is executed five times and our final result is an average of these five samples. The local serveris restarted between different products and one initial ‘test’ run is conducted prior to testing to install Adobe Flash
Player, an add-on which is used by many popular websites.

We used a single script in testing Benchmarks 10-13. The script consecutively executes tests for Benchmarks 1013. The script times each phase in these benchmarks using CommandTimer.exe and appends results to a log file.

This test measures the amount of time required for the system to copy, move and delete samples of files in various
file formats. This sample was made up of 812 files over 760,867,636 bytes and can be categorized as documents[26% of total], media files [54% of total] and PE files (i.e. System Files) [20% of total].
The breakdown of the main file types, file numbers and total sizes of the files in the sample set is shown in thefollowing table:

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

File format

NumberSize (bytes)

DOC

830,450,176

DOCX

4

13,522,409

PPT

3

5,769,216

PPTX

3

4,146,421

XLS

4

2,660,352

XLSX

4

1,426,054

PDF

73

136,298,049

ZIP

4

6,295,987

7Z

1

92,238JPG

351

31,375,259

GIF

6148,182MOV

7

57,360,371

RM

1

5,658,646

AVI

8

78,703,408

Page 22 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

WMV

546,126,167

MP3

28

191,580,387

EXE

19

2,952,914

DLL

104

29,261,568

AX

118,432CPL

22,109,440

CPX

2

4,384

DRV

10

154,864

ICO

1

107,620MSC

141,587

NT

1

1,688

ROM

2

36,611SCR

22,250,240

SYS

1

37,528,093

TLB

3

135,580

TSK

1

1,152

UCE

1

22,984EXE

192,952,914

DLL

104

29,261,568

AX

118,432CPL

22,109,440

CPX

2

4,384

DRV

10

154,864

ICO

1

107,620MSC

141,587

NT

1

1,688

ROM

2

36,611SCR

22,250,240

SYS

1

37,528,093

TLB

3

135,580

TSK

1

1,152

UCE

1

22,984

Total

812

760,867,636

PassMark SoftwareThis test was conducted five times to obtain the average time to copy, move and delete the sample files, with thetest machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 23 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark SoftwareThis test measured the amount of time required to compress and decompress a sample set of files. For this test,
we used a subset of the media and documents files used in the File Copy, Move, and Delete benchmark.
CommandTimer.exe recorded the amount of time required for 7zip.exe to compress the files into a *.zip andsubsequently decompress the created *.zip file.
This subset comprised 1,218 files over 783 MB. The breakdown of the file types, file numbers and total sizes of thefiles in the sample set is shown in the following table:
File Type

File Number

Total Size

.xls

13

9.23 MB.xlsx

93.51 MB.ppt

97.37 MB.pptx

1117.4 MB.doc

17

35.9 MB.docx

1924.5 MB.gif

177

1.10 MB.jpg

737

66.2 MB.png

15948.9 MB.mov7

54.7 MB.rm

1

5.39 MB.avi

46

459 MB.wma

1148.6 MB.avi

46

459 MB.wma

1148.6 MB

Total

1218

783 MB

This test was conducted five times to obtain the average file compression and decompression speed, with the test
machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

This benchmark was derived from Oli Warner’s File I/O test at http://www.thepcspy.com (please see Reference#1: What Really Slows Windows Down).
For this test, we developed OpenClose.exe, an application that looped writing a small file to disk, then opening
and closing that file. CommandTimer.exe was used to time how long the process took to complete 180,000 cycles.
This test was conducted five times to obtain the average file writing, opening and closing speed, with the test
machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 24 of 25
26 April 2017

Webroot SecureAnywhere Endpoint Protection vs. Seven Endpoint Security Products

PassMark SoftwareThis benchmark measured how much time was required to download a sample set of binary files of various sizes
and types over a 100MB/s network connection. The files were hosted on a server machine running Windows Server
2012 and IIS 7. CommandTimer.exe was used in conjunction with GNU Wget (version 1.10.1) to time and conduct
the download test.
The complete sample set of files was made up of 553,638,694 bytes over 484 files and two file type categories:
media files [74% of total] and documents [26% of total]. The breakdown of the file types, file numbers and total
sizes of the files in the sample set is shown in the following table:
File format

NumberSize (bytes)

JPEG

343

30,668,312

GIF

9360,349PNG

5494,780MOV

757,360,371

RM

1

5,658,646

AVI

8

78,703,408

WMV

5

46,126,167

MP3

28

191,580,387

PDF

73

136,298,049

ZIP

4

6,295,987

7Z

1

92,238

Total

484

553,638,694

This test was conducted five times to obtain the average time to download this sample of files, with the test
machine rebooted between each sample to remove potential caching effects.

The MemLog++ utility was used to record memory usage on the system while a scheduled malware scan is inprogress. Please refer to the metric “Memory usage – System Idle” above for a description of the MemLog++utility
and an explanation of the method by which memory usage is calculated.
A scheduled scan is configured on the target endpoint and once started, the MemLog++ utility is launched,enabling MemLog++ to record memory usage for 120 seconds at 12 second intervals.

Performance Benchmark
Windows 10

Page 25 of 25
26 April 2017